America Stands On the Brink of an Evangelical/Catholic-Imposed Theocracy

All in the name of “religious freedom”…and Trump’s judicial picks will be the sole arbiters.

A GOP theocracy coup against checks and balances is gaining momentum through Trump’s court picks. Trump’s legislative failures are in the news but his far-right theocracy-facilitating judicial appointments are the bigger story.

Trump’s picks will have a lasting outsized impact on American life. Trump has many judicial vacancies to fill because the GOP anti-Obama-obstruction worked.

Trump doesn’t care about the religious right’s agenda but since he has ceded the selection of judges to the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation, ultra-right groups that do care, the religious right is literally being put in power in ways most Americans don’t seem to understand. I do understand because in the 1970s and 80s I helped craft this plan.

As Sunnivie Brydum notes in an article that I’m gratefully borrowing from in this blog we’re well on the way to making Evangelical Sharia Law permanent. Trump’s Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation judges will roll back the expansion of civil rights and civil liberties that have developed over the past seven decades. Women, gays, blacks- beware. America is headed for Saudi-style repression and religious theocracy in the name of “religious liberty.”

What’s been astounding in filling the open seats left because of GOP- Obama obstruction is the rapid pace of committee hearings and confirmations for Trump’s Federalist Society-Heritage Foundation far-right religious extremist judicial nominees. The breakneck pace is unprecedented. This is not a coincidence. It fulfills a dream hatched by my late father Francis Schaeffer and me. We crafted this in Dad’s book A Christian Manifesto (1983). It sold hundreds of thousands of copies. The media paid no attention.

The ideological evangelical/conservative Catholic extremism of Trump’s Federalist Society-Heritage Foundation appointments should alarm anyone not willing to live in what will amount to an American version of Iran. The nominees are deeply conservative and often unqualified. No one on the right cares about their lack of qualifications because they will reverse abortion rights, gay rights, voting rights and affirmative action.

One of Trump’s judicial nominees has supported “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ youth and supported legislation that would allow employers to discriminate against gay employees under the guise of religious liberty.

A memorandum made public last week proposed a court-packing plan that will give Trump hundreds of new appointments to the federal judiciary. These partisan religious right picks will make the federal judiciary a theocracy stronghold that won’t shift for decades.

Remember that facts don’t matter here anymore than judicial pick’s qualifications. Trump doesn’t deceive his followers rather he creates an environment in which whether something is true or not becomes irrelevant. All that matters is if it feels good for a moment. And Trump’s white evangelical supporters crave winning the culture wars I helped start—even while Trump’s GOP shafts them by raising their taxes to make rich GOP donors richer.

And nothing distracts (middle-class voters from the fact their Medicare is about to be cut) better than sharply focused hate. “Those most powerful in society have always been able to wield religious freedom arguments for their own interests,” says Tisa Wenger, associate professor of American religious history at Yale.

The Christian right’s religious freedom talk is designed to be a distraction as used by Trump. But there is an underlying reality: Religious conservatives are set to impose their cultural mores on broader society.

Trump’s borrowed theocracy policy began gradually in the late 1970s and ’80s, following Roe v. Wade. My dad Francis Schaeffer and I led the way on this with C Everett Koop who then became Ronald Reagan’s surgeon general. Forty years later the white evangelicals gave us Trump out of frustration because their agenda wasn’t winning. Now it is! And I found myself writing these words in my new book, LETTER TO LUCY — A manifesto of creative redemption in the age of Trump, fascism and lies:

“I ask myself these questions silently and inwardly: How may I atone for helping to poison America with certainty addiction? How do I defend my grandchildren against the religious right juggernaut I helped create? How do I reject what my parents stood for (fundamentalist fanaticism) and yet honor the love they gave me? How can I help my grandchildren stumble upon the goodness of life before they’re sold towering mounds of brain-damaging garbage? How do I help save the world? (And what kind of deluded messianic fool am I to believe that this is even possible?)”

Evangelicals and conservative Catholics settled on a highly effective framing of “religious freedom” painting any participation in (or association with) gay rights or abortion as an infringement on their “sincerely held religious beliefs.” As I describe in Letter to Lucy, Dad and I began this strategy in reference to taking away women’s abortion rights as a matter of Christian “conscience.”

Evangelicals and conservative Catholics have successfully taken what we did and 40 years later are framing their opposition to gays and abortion rights in a compelling way making freedom of conscience their claim but ALSO forcing their religious fundamentalism on millions of Americans – in fact on the majority — who have no connection to extremist religious beliefs. This is tyranny.

“Religious freedom” litigation in the 21st Century has increasingly attempted to expand the definition of what may be considered a religious practice. A ruling in favor of Masterpiece Cakeshop against gays would expand this sphere to the very gates of theocracy. And this is just a foretaste of what Trump’s deluge of court-packing appointments will do.

With legal recognition for LGBT people Trump’s evangelicals are recycling the “religious freedom” argument to oppose gay and women’s rights. The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) a “Christian” legal nonprofit is leading the way imposing theocracy as “religious freedom.” It models its strategy on the Christian legal groups Dad inspired in the 1980s like the Rutherford Institute.

Just as evangelicals today use the arguments Dad and I forged against legal abortion rights to bash gays, so too using the “religious freedom” evangelical argument white supremacists will soon also be using religious exemption non-discrimination laws. Their plan will be to facilitate the resurgence of Nazis and white supremacist activities as above the law, exempted from restraint because bigotry too will be a religious right. Trump’s far-right white judges will rule in their favor.

Given the highly effective Evangelical/Catholic legal framing of “religious freedom” Dad helped invent, look for Nazis and white supremacist (Trump’s “good people” carrying torches) working on rulings in favor the right to a faith-based Nazi hate bubble. Anti-Semitism is also a Christian tradition!

Bedrock American religious liberty ideals have been used to justify imperialism, racism, slavery, misogyny, and (recently) anti-LGBT animus. Trump’s far-right religious zealot judicial picks will soon be deciding cases in favor of overt discrimination as a bedrock all-American “religious freedom.”

Despite the long history of Supreme Court adjudication of religious freedom claims, the precise nature of what the Court considers to be a legitimate faith-based issue used to vary widely. It’s now tilting to the far theocratic right.

Correction Frank . Despite the inability of the Religious ( never ) Right to distinguish between the two because they know nothing of the Bible they claim to adhere to .. the correct term for what they are trying in vain to create as their numbers diminish and their churches empty across the land is ;

A Hierocracy … not a Theocracy

And the simple fact is .. if they foolishly continue to pursue their current misguided course .. the Federal and Supreme Courts will have no choice but to begin prosecution against each and every one of them for sedition and treason against the the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights they claim to uphold

Once again Gory … any genuine and responsible US citizen will be concerned .. not scared by the fact that a bunch of blind religious sycophants are being taken in by a cadre of neo fascist Ayn Rand adherents in the attempt to bring about a false religious state in order to accomplish their own agenda of greed and self worship .

As should any genuine Biblical Christian . Which neither you nor the Pillsbury Doughboy Harmon pretending to be a christian are

So sorry to be the bearer of bad news Gory .. but the only one laughing out loud here .. is us …. laughing our heads off at you and that foot you so continually and firmly plant down your throat .

I just love that lamebrained dodge: “She hated Christians and Catholics just like he does.” If I had a nickel for every time someone warned about theocracy and then got accused of hating Christians”, I’d be a billionaire. How about you face facts that you don’t want to admit instead of your childish, lame dodge? Oh, BTW, I notice your wording “Christians and Cathoilics”. Are Catholics not Christians?

… which is to say Frank .. don’t take the panic ridden hyperbole path of Chicken Little … though there are challenges ahead of us … the sky is not falling .. nor is it ever likely to

In addendum . Pence’s pretense of a theocracy is neither inspired nor derived by the later writings of your father Francis Scheaffer .

By Pence’s own words and what he demands of each and every one of his staff members * … his sole inspiration is … Ayn Rand

So in light of this recent spat of panic driven errors .. might I heartily suggest you step back for a moment … and breath ?

Because honestly going off half cocked like this only serves to diminish your well earned credibility

* Pence has demanded since his governorship .. that everyone working for him read both ” The Fountainhead ” and ” Atlas Shrugged ” as well as committing several chapters to memory along mandating that they become active and participatory members of the ARI ( Ayn Rand Institute ) … In other words … Pence does not believe in nor does he want a Theocracy / Hierocracy … but rather like Trump. ( and Ryan ) .. Pence is merely using religion and its blinded sycophant adherents to accomplish political ends

Abortion and queers. Two of the pillars of liberalism. The other pillar being anti-Christianity. Frank is terrified that it will become illegal to murder an unborn child. Which proves that Frank loves death. Frank loves sexual perverts and hates Christians. He could have that put on his tombstone.

….too stupid to know that the 350 lb orangutan god Trump ( and his kind ) they bow down before , worship and support hates them with a passion desiring to make them all subservient to the rest of us of moderate to extreme wealth

And you know what will be on your tombstone once all is said and done .. not that you’re family will be able to afford one ? Nothing … because thats what you are … a pile of excreted digital … nothing

Funny thing Gory . Thats just what the Donald said . And how much did he wind up paying me ? Hmmm … let me see now … that was awhile back … oh yeah … double the appraised value plus a $500k penalty on top of all attorney and court costs… in 1979 .

But hey Gory … if that was supposed to be perceived as a threat .. again .. bring it on .. fact is … bring the Pillsbury DumbBoy Harmon along with you . At least that way there’s the potential of it being somewhat … entertaining

“Now good time to be Hindu!” — Hindu man on the train in the movie Ghandi when they weren’t sure if they were going to fit between the top of the train and the tunnel. Or, be a Christian who accepts that there will be “a new heaven and a new earth,” or whatever analogy that helps us accept that the world isn’t a permanent thing, nor, the complete reality. The suffering is incomprehensible— war, famine, injustice, and destruction. And yet we are here, trying to reflect love, beauty, and truth. To paraphrase your father, how shall we live? Shall we affirm Louis Armstrong or … ? You father, and you for a time, didn’t. As Morpheus would say, would you believe me if I told you that billions of living creatures are born every day and live a miserably short and painful life only to be killed and eaten by a single rapacious species wreaking, possibly irreversible damage to the system that supports life for all these creatures? Well, you know that already. We’re Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, or we’re (ultimately) forgiven and spotless. And in the mean time, we get to see people’s true colors in this drama of light and dark.

” We’re Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, or we’re (ultimately) forgiven and spotless ”

Biblical Theology 101 ;

Fact is Mr Ratzesberger … For Believers … It is not a case of A or B .. it is both . e.g. We are sinners in the hands of an angry and just God … with our sins covered over by the sacrifice of Christ on the cross … yet … still sinners till end of our days until the final judgment day when we are finally and completely washed clean .

FYI; Perhaps the most grievous error of the self righteous Religious (never ) Right is the fact that they no longer recognize their culpability and sinfulness … thinking wrongly that by simply confessing Christ their sins are completely gone forever therefore all they chose to do and say is fully justifiable in the eyes of God .

e.g. They consider themselves equal with God … Which … is one of the core principles of heretical Gnosticism

As for what religion would I chose today assuming absolute and objective proof were forthcoming showing Christianity to be false ? *

A Zen Buddhist …. repeating the Zen koan/ mantra of … ” do not be concerned with that I have no control over …. do not be concerned with that I have no control over … ” .. endlessly and repeatedly till becoming hoarse in the process . Tossing in the wisdom of Sun Tzu ( ” The Art of War ” )…

” Many times the best strategy is to sit quietly by the side of the river and wait for the bodies of your enemy to come floating downstream ”

… for good measure .

* Apologies to Frank for the stark contradiction but the fact remains if objective , viable and verifiable proof is the final test of truth ( and it should be ) …. there is more evidence both historical , mathematical etc proving genuine properly interpreted Biblical Christianity to be true .. than there is available to prove it false

According to Schaeffer, if Trump appoints the federal judges he wants, then the theocracy will be achieved!!! Who knew it would be that easy?? We need at least two of the liberals on the Supreme Court to go away so we can get control of that court.

Ahhh .. sorry Gory .. once again hate to be the bearer of bad news but … the majority of the conservative judges on the court .. including the newest Goresuch ( unless his supreme master/minder Philip Anschutz sees a profit in it ) .. do not side with the religious ( never ) right .. in the slightest

But to put a little perspective on you and Frank . Here’s a little reality fix ;

The US like it or not … runs on the principal that ” Money talks and BS walks ” … with the overwhelming majority of the wealth in the US .. including 4 of the great 8 worldwide … residing firmly within the hands of the liberals and specifically Silicon Valley .. Peter ( I wanna be a hobbit ) Theil excepted . And even Theil’s now telling Trump & Co where to shove it … threatening to take himself and his wealth to NZ

Which is to say Gory … things may get a bit rough around the land … ( and in fact I hope they do ) .. but ultimately … you lose !

Fact is as much as Trump & Co despise your kind … even if you think you’ve won .. you lose

Did I or did I not recommend in my above comment directed to Frank that he take a step back .. chill a bit ,,, and regain a bit of perspective on the matter lest he lose some if not much of his well earned credibility ?

Why yes I did . Quite vehemently in fact . So why are you bringing this up ?

In as far as you calling Frank’s life worthless … thats a bit of a joke coming from a pile of digital excrement completely devoid of substance , accomplishment , ethics and morals Biblical or otherwise such as yourself .

The Supreme Court that passed Roe v Wade was NOT majority conservative. No conservative would have voted to legalize abortion based on the US Constitution, since there is nothing in the Constitution that would support such a thing.

Neither was the majority of the Supreme Court conservative that legalized same-sex marriage. The Constitution does not require either abortion or ssm to be legal.

Golly … aint you jes such a brilliant little fool as I delve into my heaping plate of schadenfreude … again at your expense

Enjoy poverty Gory … cause as long as Trump and the current GOP remains in office .. such is your lot in life … fact is .. you may even wind up like Lot’s wife as you wallow in the depths of your self imposed Sodom & Gomorrah

Now pardon me … but my schadenfreude’s getting cold . And let me tell you little man … I’ll be laughing all the way to the bank once I’m done .. with several more heaping platefuls on the way . Ahhh the joys of being an elite … when the very worst of the elite are running the show … toodles ! 😎

” Neither was the majority of the Supreme Court conservative that legalized same-sex marriage. The Constitution does not require either abortion or ssm to be legal ”

Oh yes they were child . In fact once again Scalia voted in favor of same sex marriage … because little one … there is nothing in the entire Constitution nor the Bill of Rights making either illegal . In fact .. once again Bubba Gory … just the opposite

In both abortion and ssm, the Supreme Court claimed the US Constitution required both to be legal and that, the court said, is why they had to legalize both. But that is not true. There is nothing in the US Constitution that requires either abortion or ssm to be legal. Which means the majority on the court lied about their reasons for voting as they did. Which means both rulings were illegitimate.

THE US of A IS NOT …. NEVER HAS BEEN … NOR WILL IT EVER BE A THEOCRACY , HIEROCRACY or even so much as a RELIGIOUS STATE

( Regardless of what your 350 lb orangutan and his albino side kick are promising you )

Nor is the Declaration of Independence , US Constitution or the Bill of Rights based on the Bible , Christianity or even religion . They are secular documents written by an overwhelming majority of secular men basing the majority of their ideas on those of Greek , Roman and to a lesser extent English and Dutch society .. minus the monarchy

Now go enjoy your last remaining moments of solvency while you still can

” In both abortion and ssm, the Supreme Court claimed the US Constitution required both to be legal and that, the court said, is why they had to legalize both. But that is not true. There is nothing in the US Constitution that requires either abortion or ssm to be legal. Which means the majority on the court lied about their reasons for voting as they did. Which means both rulings were illegitimate ”

Once again Bubba Gory … try reading the US Constitution and the facts rather than …

Martin, Scalia was one of four dissenting votes in Obergfell v Hodges. You are ignorant of the facts.

While it may be true that the Constitution does not prohibit abortion or ssm, neither does it require them to be legal. The majority of the SC in both cases claimed the legality was required by the Constitution, which means they lied.

Fact is … as always … the only liar present …. is you … your delusions of grandeur and self righteousness … and your your ignorant white trash gun waving pastor wanna be’s and social media

Now like I said Bubba Gory … go enjoy your last remaining moments of financial solvency and freedom while you still can… cause your kind’s days are numbered as your precious GOP reduces you and yours to indentured servitude .

” Martin, Scalia was one of four dissenting votes in Obergfell v Hodges. You are ignorant of the facts.

While it may be true that the Constitution does not prohibit abortion or ssm, neither does it require them to be legal. The majority of the SC in both cases claimed the legality was required by the Constitution, which means they lied ”

…and in fact in several interviews after upholding both SSM and abortion incurring the wrath of many from the religious ( never ) right … Justice Scalia stated unequivocally that there was no valid reason within the Constitution to deny SSM ( or abortion ) and that in fact in light of the overriding issues of Freedom of Choice , the Pursuit of Happiness etc just the opposite was true .

His words .. not mine ..

In fact more than once Scalia voted to refuse to hear several additional anti abortion and SSM cases and appeals before the Supreme Court .. again to the great dismay of the religious ( never ) right

Ahhhh … but I just shattered your little myth /alt fact / revisionist history based life again … didn’t I .

” Martin, I searched the internet, including YouTube to see if I could find any evidence that Scalia ever changed his mind and supported ssm. I could not find anything that proves he did. Scalia voted against ssm in the Obergfell case. You denied that, which proves you don’t know what you are talking about ”

Gory … as with your claiming to be a christian .. pretending to be a member of any IFB church ( surprise ! you’re not .. there being no record of a Gary Bryson .. Gary S Bryson . or a Gary Neil Bryson .. appearing in any IFB church’s membership roles ) .. not to mention your multiple constant and consistent errors lies and bs ..

Is it any surprise that your lack of intellect and integrity is only surpassed by your utter incompetency to make use of the net ?

Why no .. it does not .

So once again … who cares what you think or believe ? Not only are you a troll …. but a rather incompetent little troll at that

Martin, I’m convinced you are lying about Scalia and ssm. If you read his dissent in Obergfell, he would have to have a complete change of position to then support ssm, which I never heard of him having.

The Supreme court could only legitimately rule that ssm must be legal if the US Constitution required it to be, which it does not do. Scalia voted against legalizing ssm in the Obergfell case, along with three other judges. It was a 5/4 decision by the SC.

Thats rich Gory . Our pathetic immature little wanna be christian who knows less about the denomination he supposedly belongs to than he does about the Bible he claims to adhere to and the Constitution he claims to uphold is now going to pretend lecture me on the facts concerning Justice Scalia’s reversals on the issues of SSM and abortion … due to the fact that after carful consideration Justice Scalia realized being the Constitutional absolutist that he was … that he was …. wrong .

Gee Gory .. imagine that … a mature , intelligent educated thoughtful individual deciding he had been mistaken when several appeals later came before the bench then making his reversal public …. on … CBS Sunday Morning … 60 Minutes … CNN … MSNBC …and the Charlie Rose show .

Damn … a mature male … a conservative one even .. admitting he was wrong … on two counts never the less ! Amazing that the entire world didn’t come to an end

In closing Gory … to borrow the line on the front of the locally hand made , hand printed T-shirt I purchased from the maker this summer :

” Facts and Science Do Not Care What You Think ”

Nor does either care what you may or may not be convinced of . Especially in light of your less than zero credibility rating .

Martin, I searched the internet, including YouTube to see if I could find any evidence that Scalia ever changed his mind and supported ssm. I could not find anything that proves he did. Scalia voted against ssm in the Obergfell case. You denied that, which proves you don’t know what you are talking about.

Of poor butthurt Gory… Must be really hard for you to accept, that albeit much to his chagrin, it was in fact Scalia’s dissent that made for the 5/4 in favor of SSM. Which and on that note, here it is in his own words…

“When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases. When it comes to determining the meaning of a vague constitutional provision—such as “due process of law” or “equal protection of the laws”—it is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification.[12] We have no basis for striking down a practice that is not expressly prohibited by the Fourteenth Amendment’s text, and that bears the endorsement of a long tradition of open, widespread, and unchallenged use dating back to the Amendment’s ratification. Since there is no doubt whatever that the People never decided to prohibit the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples, the public debate over same-sex marriage must be allowed to continue. But the Court ends this debate, in an opinion lacking even a thin veneer of law. Buried beneath the mummeries and straining-to-be-memorable passages of the opinion is a candid and startling assertion: No matter what it was the People ratified, the Fourteenth Amendment protects those rights that the Judiciary, in its “reasoned judgment,” thinks the Fourteenth Amendment ought to protect.[13] That is so because “[t]he generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions . . . . ”[14] One would think that sentence would continue: “. . . and therefore they provided for a means by which the People could amend the Constitution,” or perhaps “. . . and therefore they left the creation of additional liberties, such as the freedom to marry someone of the same sex, to the People, through the never-ending process of legislation.” But no. What logically follows, in the majority’s judge-empowering estimation, is: “and so they entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning.”[15] The “we,” needless to say, is the nine of us. “History and tradition guide and discipline [our] inquiry but do not set its outer boundaries.”[16] Thus, rather than focusing on the People’s understanding of “liberty”—at the time of ratification or even today—the majority focuses on four “principles and traditions” that, in the majority’s view, prohibit States from defining marriage as an institution consisting of one man and one woman.[17]”

Tough… I know. I can just imagine the angst that must have caused Scalia. To wit, although there are lingering questions about how Scalia died, it has been widely accepted that the cause was myocardial infarction, most likely brought on by the emotional upset/anger he was feeling at the time, which is well documented to be a huge trigger for the condition.

Yeah… well… I can’t say I happy about that the Tax Reform passed, being that I can’t see how I am going to survive having to pay more taxes so that the ultra-rich can get to keep more of their money. But, being the eternal optimist, I draw great comfort in knowing that now that the GOP has finally gotten what they have been yearning for, they no longer have any use for the 350 Lbs. albatross hanging from their necks! It sure is going to be entertaining watching them all scurrying like cockroaches from him, lest they get splattered when the sh*t all 350 + Lbs. of it hits the fan. Talk about theater on an epic scale!

D. Mario… The only thing creepy here is how you have taken a comment about Bryson’s gender confusion (one must question what could have caused his extreme homophobia as in “the lady doth protest too much, methinks”) to be all about you! As for your comment about Frank’s granddaughter… You are one very sick puppy to say such a grotesque thing! Not to say that I expected anything less from you and your kind, that is…

Did I say that he changed his mind? NO! What I said, was that it was in fact Scalia’s dissent that made for the 5/4 in favor of SSM. Which, being the homophobic that he was, must have caused him untold anger and angst. Then again, he just “had” to come off as a “holier than thou” know-it-all. The defeat he must have felt of having his own words used to make a case in favor of what he spent a lifetime opposing, must have been unbearably mortifying! Little wonder that he died shortly afterwards…

As for your extreme homophobia… It is a known fact that clerical child abuse and sexaul molestation runs rampant among Catholics and Evangelical Christians, particularly with those who subscribe to the KJB. As such, methinks, that your pathologically obsessive homophobia is not so much about your religious indoctrination, as much as it is about your unresolved feelings of what happened during your childhood, which resulted in you doubting your sexuality.

Trust me! I know a thing or two about such things, and your relentless non-stop compulsive posting only serves to support the underlying reason for your obsessive behavior.

I hate to have to tell you this, but I have spent years studying behavioral profiling within the criminal context, and while I am by no means saying nor accusing you of being a criminal… You are nonetheless very clearly disturbed and consumed with hatred! And while I am certain that you will vehemently deny my findings, you don’t fool me. Not for one minute!

Sorry, but no one spends a lifetime obsessed with other people’s sexuality nor show such intense contempt for a particular expression unless they have a very personal reason to do so. And while you profess otherwise, your contempt towards homosexuals (more so towards men than women) has little to do with the bible, (of which you clearly only know that which serves to shield you from probing questions allowing you to deflect from that which you don’t want to deal with), and everything to do with your unresolved issues regarding your own sexuality.

And while it is true that most bible thumpers condemn homosexuality, they don’t relentlessly obsess about it in the pathological manner that you do. That you would, to such an unhealthy extent, to the point that you are clearly stalking Frank’s blog in an unrelenting non-stop round the clock 24/7 watch, just waiting for him to post a new thread just so that you can be the first to comment with your continuously derogatory and hateful rhetoric, tells me that it is all deeply personal to you. Which in turn begs the question: Why would someone one do that, unless it really is THAT personal?

Who knows… Maybe I am. Why? What’s it to you? Other than just another reason for you to get off on telling me how I’m going to be going to hell to endure eternal torture… And you still think that you are not a sadistic pervert?

Yes D. Mario… I’ve always had quite an effect on men. Even as a child… Poor old Gory wouldn’t be the first to lose his mind and be driven to perdition over me. But don’t worry. I can more than deal with it, and won’t be losing any sleep because of him.

Frank, why does your Dad have a hedge growing out of his bears? Is that to make him look more like an Islamic fundamentalist? Seriously though, I never bought his brand of Christianity and ‘discovered’ 20+ years into my life as a Christian that I was really an Anabaptist and always had been. I suspect the Anabaptists, at least the ones who haven’t imposed a local Anabaptist ‘Christendom’, will be key to freeing both the churches and the state from theocracy.

While I agree with the moral positions the evangelicals hold about the different issues, as a Bible-based Christian, I don’t believe we have the right to impose or force them on others. As Jesus taught, every person should have freedom of choice.

What is touchy is, is allowing people to murder unborn infants freedom of choice that everyone should support? Do we allow people on the street to kill each other without consequence?

Do we allow Islam to overrun America, when their religious beliefs (whether you or they admit it or not) clearly state from their Koran that they are not to tolerate any other religion, and infidels must be killed? Do we overlook the agenda behind those who are trying to destroy America by immigrating it to death, so we’ll seem politically correct?

Do we ignore the clear Biblical teachings on sexual deviations/adultery of every kind, to be inclusive and unbigoted and politically correct?

I would suggest that what is proper is to not make laws that promote and protect these social ills, yet not make laws to enforce something that is Christian-oriented, more than just morally correct, such as not allowing murder.

I’m afraid your scenario is going to play out pretty much as you say, because Bible prophecy predicted this long ago. The bad part is that there is going to be a time of trouble such as never was, but the good part leads to the fact that Jesus is coming and will put an eternal stop to this mess and the infection of sin.

The common thread between Bryson and Diana Marie is that they are both religious bullies who want to control of the government so that they and their kind can enforce their version of their beliefs on others. If they can’t convince you to agree with them, they will foment to change the laws of the state. If the state is unwilling( difficult since we still have a rule of law based on the Constitution), then they’ll try through the democratic process by foisting fellow bullies such as such as Pence or worse, Roy Moore on the nation. That’s how they believe they can control the state to inflict their tyranny on others.
That is totally Un-American..
The good news is that “more American voters than ever say they are not religious, making the religiously unaffiliated the nation’s biggest voting bloc by faith.” Now we just have to get them out to vote their interest.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/14/the-non-religious-are-now-the-countrys-largest-religious-voting-bloc/?utm_term=.dccf76a4f597